The party of "no"
It appears there's a movement among Republicans to position themselves against spending to save the economy. Mitch McConnell speaks against the stimulus package, and the RNC is thinking about an unprecedented policy vote against the bailouts.
One of the advantages of being in the minority is that you can vote "no" and not be held responsible for any outcomes.
The flipside is that they could be portrayed as out of touch with people's pain. (Is McConnell just talking, or does he intend to do anything about it.)
One of the advantages of being in the minority is that you can vote "no" and not be held responsible for any outcomes.
The flipside is that they could be portrayed as out of touch with people's pain. (Is McConnell just talking, or does he intend to do anything about it.)
posted by mikevotes at
10:21 PM
2 Comments:
Mike wrote:
One of the advantages of being in the minority is that you can vote "no" and not be held responsible for any outcomes.
Quite true, but if the Republicans lose this fight it seems likely they will be consigned to irrelevance at least until the mid-terms. Certainly those millions who are employed or have their jobs saved by the Administration's economic plan will be reminded that the Republicans vehemently opposed it.
As I've said before, Republicans really like winners and really despise losers. If the GOP is perceived as "losing" on this issue, the mid-terms could be even tougher for them.
As we saw in the election, the Republicans are completely willing to make high-stakes gambles on issues that clearly fail to resonate with the electorate at large. For example, "socialism", Ayers, the Culture War, etc.
The Party as a whole has given up on talking to the nation; they instead are concentrating on talking to "their own". That is an excellent strategy for irrelevance. It continues the gradual slide of the Party to being little more than "anti-Democrats", as the obvious question will be where this concern for fiscal restraint was in the Bush Administration's reign.
By
Todd Dugdale , at 1:03 PM
That's the challenge. I think this is them laying down a costless political chit.
It's like a flu shot. The bailouts just stave off an ill defined disaster, and if the Dems pass them anyway, the Repubs can argue that we weren't going to get the flu anyway.
When the deficit inevitably shocks the conscience, after the immediate threat is forgotten, they can say they were against it and reclaim anti-deficit as part of the brand.
I accept that they may get pilloried today, but I'm not so sure this doesn't potentially help them down the road.
By
mikevotes, at 2:05 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home